Re: [SQLObject] sqlobject stability query

On Jul 26, 2006, at 3:29 PM, Gary Robinson wrote:
>
> [edited ... question concerning stability ...]
We (http://www.merchantcircle.com) have been using SQLObject 0.7
bugfix branch (and predecessors) for about a year. Once we sorted out
the caching issues and fixed a thread deadlock bug we've had smooth
sailing. We do currently do about O( 1 Million ) DB operations / day
and growing, using Postgres 8. Probably about 5% of our DB operations
involved queries complex enough that we found it easier to go around
SQLObject and write directly to psycopg2.
Not surprisingly, once we got to understand SQLObject's behavior
well, we became more comfortable in using it efficiently. In general
I have no love for ORM's, and IMHO SQLObject can do plenty of magic
that can easily lead to very inefficient database use. In development
mode we use "debug=True" to print out all of the queries as they
happen, and we try to be ruthless at minimizing them. SQLObject makes
it very easy to write data manipulation code in Python -- code that
might be 10x or more efficient if done in SQL in the database. I
don't believe that's the "fault" of SQLObject -- just the ORM pattern.
Anyway -- the short summary is this: it's good stuff.
-- David
---
David Creemer
http://www.zachary.com

Thread view

Hi,
We're considering using sqlobject in our product
(http://www.goombah.com).
I noticed a post from Ian Bicking at
http://blog.ianbicking.org/sqlobject-2.html where he announces
sqlobject 2 and says "To be quite honest, I have had a hard time
maintaining SQLObject, and have not given it the attention it should. I
expect I am not the only one who created something that I later found
difficult to work with; that I myself am responsible for all the
problems, and made all the bad decisions, makes it worse -- for every
problem I could go and fix it, but I can't fix them all as they come in
(or I might just be opening up other problems), and as a result I don't
fix any. Oleg Broytmann has done a good job giving it the project the
more consistent attention that I have not, but when you are working on
a project written by someone else it can be hard to make certain
changes."
That discouraged me with regard to the prospects of my company becoming
committed to sqlobject. On the other hand, it appears that sqlobject
0.7 is now in actual production use in TurboGears; judging by the fact
that it's included in the TurboGears download and documentation (I
haven't used TurboGears).
So the things I'm wondering are:
a) How stable is sqlobject 0.7?
b) Will there be a fairly easy upgrade path from 0.x to 2.0?
c) Anyone know of other projects using it (other than TurboGears-based
projects)?
d) Any other comments about its current goodness for production use
relative to, say, SQLAlchemy?
Many thanks in advance for any feedback.
Gary
--
Gary Robinson
CTO
Emergent Music, LLC
grobinson@...
207-942-3463
Company: http://www.goombah.com
Blog: http://www.garyrobinson.net

On Jul 26, 2006, at 3:29 PM, Gary Robinson wrote:
>
> [edited ... question concerning stability ...]
We (http://www.merchantcircle.com) have been using SQLObject 0.7
bugfix branch (and predecessors) for about a year. Once we sorted out
the caching issues and fixed a thread deadlock bug we've had smooth
sailing. We do currently do about O( 1 Million ) DB operations / day
and growing, using Postgres 8. Probably about 5% of our DB operations
involved queries complex enough that we found it easier to go around
SQLObject and write directly to psycopg2.
Not surprisingly, once we got to understand SQLObject's behavior
well, we became more comfortable in using it efficiently. In general
I have no love for ORM's, and IMHO SQLObject can do plenty of magic
that can easily lead to very inefficient database use. In development
mode we use "debug=True" to print out all of the queries as they
happen, and we try to be ruthless at minimizing them. SQLObject makes
it very easy to write data manipulation code in Python -- code that
might be 10x or more efficient if done in SQL in the database. I
don't believe that's the "fault" of SQLObject -- just the ORM pattern.
Anyway -- the short summary is this: it's good stuff.
-- David
---
David Creemer
http://www.zachary.com

On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 06:29:48PM -0400, Gary Robinson wrote:
> a) How stable is sqlobject 0.7?
Pretty stable.
> b) Will there be a fairly easy upgrade path from 0.x to 2.0?
Nobody knows yet.
> c) Anyone know of other projects using it (other than TurboGears-based
> projects)?
The company I am working for uses SQLObject in a number of commercial
projects. That's why I work on SQLObject.
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmann http://phd.pp.ru/ phd@...
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.